BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

23 results for “TDS”+ Section 244A(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai269Delhi157Bangalore86Kolkata51Chennai23Karnataka22Ahmedabad14Pune7Chandigarh7Jaipur6Hyderabad4Cochin4Dehradun4Lucknow4SC3Himachal Pradesh2Cuttack1Ranchi1Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 244A40Section 80P(2)(a)21Section 15420Section 143(3)15Section 246A14TDS14Section 1111Deduction11Section 14710Addition to Income

BRAKES INDIA LIMITED,,CHENNAI vs. DCIT (LTU), CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 758/CHNY/2012[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.758/Chny/2012 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03) M/S. Brakes India Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Ltu) Padi, Chennai-600 101. Chennai-600 050. Pan: Aaacb 2533Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 140ASection 143(3)Section 244A

1) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the appellant is not entitled to the differential claim of interest u/s 244A on refund as claimed by it? 2) Whether the Tribunal was right in law in not following the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case

SHRIRAM INSIGHT SHARE BROKERS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

Showing 1–20 of 23 · Page 1 of 2

10
Section 409
Rectification u/s 1549
ITA 733/CHNY/2015[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 May 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.733, 734 & 735/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun C. Bharat, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37

1,41,740/-, even though the return of income was filed within the stipulated period. According to the Ld. counsel, the due 23 I.T.A. Nos.733 to 735/Mds/15 date of return of income was extended upto 15.10.2010 for the assessment year under consideration. Therefore, the interest, if any, has to be recomputed in accordance with the CBDT notification

SHRIRAM INSIGHT SHARE BROKERS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

ITA 734/CHNY/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 May 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.733, 734 & 735/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun C. Bharat, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37

1,41,740/-, even though the return of income was filed within the stipulated period. According to the Ld. counsel, the due 23 I.T.A. Nos.733 to 735/Mds/15 date of return of income was extended upto 15.10.2010 for the assessment year under consideration. Therefore, the interest, if any, has to be recomputed in accordance with the CBDT notification

SHRIRAM INSIGHT SHARE BROKERS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

ITA 735/CHNY/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 May 2016AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.733, 734 & 735/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09, 2010-11 & 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun C. Bharat, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37

1,41,740/-, even though the return of income was filed within the stipulated period. According to the Ld. counsel, the due 23 I.T.A. Nos.733 to 735/Mds/15 date of return of income was extended upto 15.10.2010 for the assessment year under consideration. Therefore, the interest, if any, has to be recomputed in accordance with the CBDT notification

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. SHRI NACHIMUTHU PALANISWAMY, CHENNAI

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1032/CHNY/2022[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 May 2023AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1032/Chny/2022 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Acit Shri Nachimuthu Palaniswamy, बनाम/ Central Circle-3(3), 82, Cathedral Road, Vs. Chennai. Gopalapuram, Chennai-600 086. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adopp-9910-F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal (Jcit)-Ld. Sr. Dr " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Y.Sridhar (Fca) -Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16-05-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 16-05-2023 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT)-Ld. Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Y.Sridhar (FCA) -Ld. AR
Section 153ASection 154Section 244(1)(aa)Section 244A

1) or on regular assessment, because there is no proviso to s. 244A(l)(b) as provided under s. 244A(l)(a). 5.4. That apart, the law is well-settled that even for the refund of tax paid under s. 140A on self-assessment, the assessee is entitled to interest as held by this Court in CIT vs. Ashok Leyland

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SALEM vs. PANDYAN GRAMA BANK, SALEM

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the CO of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2870/CHNY/2024[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2870/Chny/2024 & Co No.06/Chny/2025 (In Ita No.: 2870/Chny/2024) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 The Assistant Commissioner Of Pandyan Grama Bank, Income Tax, Vs. Now Known As Tamil Nadu Grama Circle 1, Bank, Salem. No.6, Yercaud Road, Hasthampatty, Salem – 636 007. [Pan: Aahat-7854-K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate & Shri. P. Gurusamy, I.T.P. Department By : Shri. Shivanand K Kalakeri, C.I.T. सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15.04.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27.06.2025

For Appellant: Shri. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri. Shivanand K Kalakeri, C.I.T
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 80P

244A was wrong, erroneous, incorrect, invalid, unjustified and not sustainable both on facts and in law. 11. The Respondent craves leave to file additional grounds/arguments at the time of hearing. :-4-: I.T.A. No.:2870/Chny/2024 & C.O. No.06/Chny/2025 3. At the outset, we find that there is a delay of 39 days in appeal filed by the revenue. After hearing both

IDUMBEN KNITTERS, ,TIRUPUR CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1TIRUPUR, TIRUPUR, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 711/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 711/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Idumban Knitters Assistant Commissioner Of S.F. No. 440, 443, Sbi Colony, V. Income Tax, Gandhi Nagar Post, Circle-1, Tirupur – 641 603. Tirupur. [Pan: Aaafi-7635-P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. M A Srinivasan, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.08.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.08.2023

For Appellant: Shri. M A Srinivasan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 14Section 143Section 192Section 194JSection 270Section 40

TDS, as per the provisions of Section 194 J, stating the same as payment to Mr.U.S.Dinesh, for the services rendered by him which amounts to duplication of addition and taxing twice on one transaction, and hence illegal and not sustainable in law. Therefore, the appellant / assessee herein, humbly pray before the Hon'ble Members of ITAT, to allow this Appeal

PANDYAN GRAMA BANK,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1, VIRUDHUNAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA Nos

ITA 685/CHNY/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 685, 684, 687 & 688/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Pandyan Grama Bank, The Assistant Commissioner Of Admn. Office, Vs. Income Tax, No. 2-70-1, Collectroate Complex, Katcheri Road, Virudhunagar, 626 002. Virundhunagar, 626 001. [Pan: Aaaaap 0895P] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri P. Gurusamy, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 154Section 244ASection 246ASection 80P(2)(a)

section 246A, he is unable to admit these appeals and they are dismissed in liminie. 3. Thereafter, the assessee filed appeals on 14.09.2016 against the orders passed by the AO giving effect to the orders of the Hon’ble ITAT. with condonation petitions for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009- 10, respectively

PANDYAN GRAMA BANK,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. ACIT, VIRUDHUNAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA Nos

ITA 2445/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 685, 684, 687 & 688/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Pandyan Grama Bank, The Assistant Commissioner Of Admn. Office, Vs. Income Tax, No. 2-70-1, Collectroate Complex, Katcheri Road, Virudhunagar, 626 002. Virundhunagar, 626 001. [Pan: Aaaaap 0895P] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri P. Gurusamy, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 154Section 244ASection 246ASection 80P(2)(a)

section 246A, he is unable to admit these appeals and they are dismissed in liminie. 3. Thereafter, the assessee filed appeals on 14.09.2016 against the orders passed by the AO giving effect to the orders of the Hon’ble ITAT. with condonation petitions for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009- 10, respectively

PANDYAN GRAMA BANK,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. ACIT, VIRUDHUNAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA Nos

ITA 2444/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 685, 684, 687 & 688/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Pandyan Grama Bank, The Assistant Commissioner Of Admn. Office, Vs. Income Tax, No. 2-70-1, Collectroate Complex, Katcheri Road, Virudhunagar, 626 002. Virundhunagar, 626 001. [Pan: Aaaaap 0895P] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri P. Gurusamy, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 154Section 244ASection 246ASection 80P(2)(a)

section 246A, he is unable to admit these appeals and they are dismissed in liminie. 3. Thereafter, the assessee filed appeals on 14.09.2016 against the orders passed by the AO giving effect to the orders of the Hon’ble ITAT. with condonation petitions for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009- 10, respectively

PANDYAN GRAMA BANK,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. ACIT, VIRUDHUNAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA Nos

ITA 2443/CHNY/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 685, 684, 687 & 688/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Pandyan Grama Bank, The Assistant Commissioner Of Admn. Office, Vs. Income Tax, No. 2-70-1, Collectroate Complex, Katcheri Road, Virudhunagar, 626 002. Virundhunagar, 626 001. [Pan: Aaaaap 0895P] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri P. Gurusamy, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 154Section 244ASection 246ASection 80P(2)(a)

section 246A, he is unable to admit these appeals and they are dismissed in liminie. 3. Thereafter, the assessee filed appeals on 14.09.2016 against the orders passed by the AO giving effect to the orders of the Hon’ble ITAT. with condonation petitions for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009- 10, respectively

PANDYAN GRAMA BANK,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1, VIRUDHUNAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA Nos

ITA 688/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 685, 684, 687 & 688/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Pandyan Grama Bank, The Assistant Commissioner Of Admn. Office, Vs. Income Tax, No. 2-70-1, Collectroate Complex, Katcheri Road, Virudhunagar, 626 002. Virundhunagar, 626 001. [Pan: Aaaaap 0895P] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri P. Gurusamy, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 154Section 244ASection 246ASection 80P(2)(a)

section 246A, he is unable to admit these appeals and they are dismissed in liminie. 3. Thereafter, the assessee filed appeals on 14.09.2016 against the orders passed by the AO giving effect to the orders of the Hon’ble ITAT. with condonation petitions for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009- 10, respectively

PANDYAN GRAMA BANK,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1, VIRUDHUNAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA Nos

ITA 687/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 685, 684, 687 & 688/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Pandyan Grama Bank, The Assistant Commissioner Of Admn. Office, Vs. Income Tax, No. 2-70-1, Collectroate Complex, Katcheri Road, Virudhunagar, 626 002. Virundhunagar, 626 001. [Pan: Aaaaap 0895P] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri P. Gurusamy, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 154Section 244ASection 246ASection 80P(2)(a)

section 246A, he is unable to admit these appeals and they are dismissed in liminie. 3. Thereafter, the assessee filed appeals on 14.09.2016 against the orders passed by the AO giving effect to the orders of the Hon’ble ITAT. with condonation petitions for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009- 10, respectively

PANDYAN GRAMA BANK,VIRUDHUNAGAR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1, VIRUDHUNAGAR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA Nos

ITA 686/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 685, 684, 687 & 688/Chny/2018 & 2443, 2444 & 2445/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Pandyan Grama Bank, The Assistant Commissioner Of Admn. Office, Vs. Income Tax, No. 2-70-1, Collectroate Complex, Katcheri Road, Virudhunagar, 626 002. Virundhunagar, 626 001. [Pan: Aaaaap 0895P] (%&यथ'/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri P. Gurusamy, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 154Section 244ASection 246ASection 80P(2)(a)

section 246A, he is unable to admit these appeals and they are dismissed in liminie. 3. Thereafter, the assessee filed appeals on 14.09.2016 against the orders passed by the AO giving effect to the orders of the Hon’ble ITAT. with condonation petitions for assessment years 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009- 10, respectively

DCIT CIRCLE 2(1), TRICHY vs. THE LAKSHMI VILAS BANK LTD., KARUR

ITA 899/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri G. Sittaraman (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Guru Bashyam (CIT-DR) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 30Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 37(1)

244A; (iv) Enhancement of Income on depreciation on investments & (v) TDS Credit. The assessee is also aggrieved by the fact that revised return as filed on 21.03.2014 was not considered by the lower authorities. ITA Nos.671 & 899/Chny/2019 The subject matter of revenue’s appeal is (i) Ex-gratia payments; (ii) Interest accrued on NPAs; (iii) Rural Debts advances while computing

THE LAKSHMI VILAS BANK LIMITED,KARUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 2(1), TRICHY

ITA 671/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri G. Sittaraman (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Guru Bashyam (CIT-DR) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 244ASection 30Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 37(1)

244A; (iv) Enhancement of Income on depreciation on investments & (v) TDS Credit. The assessee is also aggrieved by the fact that revised return as filed on 21.03.2014 was not considered by the lower authorities. ITA Nos.671 & 899/Chny/2019 The subject matter of revenue’s appeal is (i) Ex-gratia payments; (ii) Interest accrued on NPAs; (iii) Rural Debts advances while computing

THINKSYNQ CONSULTING LLP,CHENNAI vs. ITO NCW E, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1530/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1530/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/S Thinksynq Consulting Llp, The Income Tax Officer, 17 (Old No.9), Seethamma Road, V. Non Corporate Ward 12(3), Alwarpet, Chennai - 600 018. Chennai - 600 006. Pan : Aagft 6098 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A. Mahesh, FCAFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, JCIT
Section 234A

TDS as per Form 16A and as per the return filed, was ₹6,73,257/- and the Assessing Officer has given credit only to the extent of ₹6,61,452/-, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the matter needs to be re-examined by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, orders of both the authorities below are set aside

M/S. SPENCER TRAVEL SERVICES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

The appeal stand partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 3387/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Apr 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Ms N.V. Lakshmi (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 201Section 244ASection 40

TDS would result into full disallowance of the expenditure. Therefore, accepting the plea of Ld. AR, we direct the assessee to demonstrate before Ld. AO that the assessee fulfills the prescribed conditions and could not be considered as assessee-in-default in terms of first proviso to sub- section (1) of Sec.201 by furnishing the requisite documents as specified therein

INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

ITA 1320/CHNY/2015[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Mar 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. C. Naresh, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Shaji P. Jacob, IRS, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 244ASection 263

1) of the Act on 29.11.2002. The ld. Assessing Officer granted TDS credit to the extent of "22,15,22,032/- as against total credit of "36,37,57,680/- in return of income and no credit was allowed for defective TDS certificates to the extent of "14,22,35,648/- and Assessing Officer completed assessment u/s.143(3) dated

THE CRAFTS COUNCIL OF INDIA,CHENNAI vs. JCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CHENNAI

ITA 945/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकरअपील सं./ Ita Nos.943, 944, 945 & 946/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-2012, 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-2017) The Crafts Council Of India, Vs. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Gf Temple Trees, Tax, Venkatnarayanana Road, (Exemptions) T. Nagar, Chennai 600 017. Chennai. [Pan: Aaatc 1433B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Irs, Jcit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 01.08.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.08.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, IRS, JCIT
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 2(15)

1). CIT(A) has considered various observations of the Apex Court in that decision on various issues dealt with by the Apex Court and has come to the conclusion that the proviso to Section 2(15) would be applicable in the case of the Appellant and for all the years he has held that "sum total of receipts from these